A Tale of Two Cities question

If I am not fascinated by page 100 I put the book back in the library bag. I don't have enough free time to waste on slogging through a 'classic' that has not captured my attention. I gave up doing things that others said were good for me years ago, especially reading 'classics', or Pulitzer Prize winners, or Dostoevsky. I tried reading Man of La Mancha and found it to be another PTSD novel written by a guy trying to come to terms with the horror of his experience of war. The newer ones are easier to get through. With all that said, I have always found Dickens to be interesting to read.

I put it down when I've made it about 1/3 of the way through and it has become a chore to read. If I'm not getting enjoyment out of a novel then what is the point of reading it. Just because it is a classic, doesn't mean it appeals to everyone. And I don't think you should suffer through a novel you hate just to say you've read it. If someone thinks less of me because I didn't like a highly praised novel then they are a pretty shallow person. Personally, I like to give a book a good chance as some may take a bit longer to get going. I would have missed out on some great books if I'd have given up too early such as Great Expectations, A Tale of Two Cities and Gone with the Wind. Great Expectations ended up being a book I put down early and then came back to because I felt I hadn't given it a fair chance and I was glad I did because it ended up being a great book that I would gladly read again. I think I was just simply not in the mood for that kind of story when I tried it the first time. However, there are a couple books that I just put down and have no desire to try again. Grapes of Wrath though such a praised classic turned my stomach to the point I despised the characters and language so much that I hated reading it so I quit and Doctor Zhivago was so very difficult to follow without being a scholar of Russian history that it felt like a chore to read so I gave up on it. So basically, it is a matter of how you feel about it. If you are just not sure you are liking a book, I'd give it a bit longer. If the thought of reading it feels like a chore, perhaps it just isn't for you and you should quit. If it is just a bit difficult but you like the plot etc. then maybe try reading a synopsis of the chapters you've read to help you understand what's going on, like sparknotes or something. I had to do that at first with Tale of Two Cities because it was a bit hard to follow in the beginning without knowing the history.

Interesting question. With my Type A personality, I find it extremely to put down a book that I'm finding difficult and not enjoying so I continue to "slog on" most times.
Re. classic literature: there are reasons that these books have withstood the test of time whether it is the language, description, the narrative, symbolism, the characters, etc. and most times, IMO, IF one sticks w/ a classic, there is a personal reward and gain. (I agree, Keri, that Zhivago was "difficult"; for me, it was Moby Dick).
In contemporary literature, IF I had not persevered w/ The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo past page 150, I would have missed one of the best reading experiences and one of the most unique characters in Lisbeth Salander, whom I found 100% fascinating.
Conversely , the Stephen King Fans BOTM was Weaveworld, Clive Barker ....OMG! I am not into fantasy plus this one was overly LONG, and you talk about a chore to even pick it up and continue but.... I did and I finished it .... I got nothing out of it except a nice dialogue between me and another GReads member about the book, which I didn't even completely understand. I should have stopped and moved on w/ that one.
So, I guess , go w/ your gut. Silly to have this albatross book and the feeling that you MUST do this but maybe it's a character builder :) Happy Reading!

I'm with Betsy, I have a difficult time "giving up" on a book. A rule of thumb I've heard, and somewhat subscribe to, is that if a book doesn't grip you by page 50 move on to something else - there are a lot of other great books out there. Tale of Two Cities definitely doesn't fit this. The down side is that you could be missing out on a great story that just builds and builds.

I'll also use groupthink a bit to determine if I should plow through, rationalizing that if a lot of other people think this book is good, (or if it's considered a classic that I feel I should read) then assume that perhaps I'm missing something, and try a little harder to discover why.

I guess it also depends on why you read. If you read for enjoyment and the book isn't enjoyable, then find something that is.

It has been a long time since I read "A Tale of Two Cities". It has been so long, I might have to read it again so I can get into discussions. I had a policy that I would hang in there with a bad book to the end, but...there have been books I have recently tried reading that I just gave up and did not care how it ended.

For example, I don't know if anyone has read, or tried to read Roberto Bolano's "2666", I just could not get into it. It is a very long book, so I lasted until around page 200 and just chucked it away. It might be the way it was translated(or the translator).

ToTC was a required reading when I was in JHS (didn't call it middle school back then). I slogged through it, skipping major sections and tried to glean just enough that I would not embarrass myself on the quizzes. Believe me, if I could have put it down and walked away, I would have:-)